Allahabad Court August 1922 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Emperor Vs. Gokal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All142
Stuart, J.1. I do not agree with the learned Sessions Judge that no offence was committed. Upon the facts the four persons convicted clearly used criminal force. I am not disposed to go out of my way to find technical excuses for persons who use criminal force towards constables acting honestly within the scope of their authority. The circumstance that the warrant which they were endeavouring to execute contained a technical defect, which the constables could not possibly have any idea of, would affect the case only this much that it renders the persons convicted not guilty of n, more serious offence. They have already been found not guilty of that offence. The position of the constables was that they had to obey orders. The persons convicted had not the vaguest idea that the warrant contained a technical defect but used criminal force to prevent the warrant being executed. I change the convictions from Section 323 to convictions under Section 352 and uphold the sentences. If Enayat ha...
Gokal and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1922
Reported in: 71Ind.Cas.503
Stuart, J.1. I do not agree with the learned Sessions Judge that no offence was committed. Upon the facts the four persons convicted clearly used criminal force, I am not disposed to go out of my way to find technical excuses for persons who use criminal force towards constables acting honestly within the scope of their authority. The circumstance that the warrant which they were endeavouring to execute contained a technical defect, which the constables could not possibly have any idea of, would affect the case only this much that it renders the persons convicted not guilty of a more serious offence. They have already been found not guilty of that offence. The position of the constables was that they had to obey orders. The persons convicted had not the vaguest idea that the warrant contained a technical defect bat used criminal force to prevent the warrant being executed. I change the convictions from Sections 323 to convictions under Section 352 and uphold the sentences. If Enayat ha...
Mingan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All86; 81Ind.Cas.56
Stuart, J.1. The learned Sessions Judge has taken a correct view of the law.2. I direct that the amount of Rs. 4-6-0 in respect of Court Fee Stamps should not be leviable from Mingan or if already realized should be refunded....
Ram Bilas Vs. Lachmi Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-08-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All84; (1923)ILR45All140; 71Ind.Cas.684
Stuart, J.1. The point raised in this application is as follows: A certain Rameshar Das swore to the contents of an affidavit in the court of the District Judge of Cawnpore in support of an application for transfer of a civil suit.2. The other side applied for sanction to prosecute Rameshar Das for having sworn false allegations in that affidavit. The District Judge refused this sanction but the High Court granted it.3. Rameshar Das is under trial in respect of the matter. In connection with that trial Lachmi Narain has instituted criminal proceedings against Ram Bilas, the employer of Rameshar Das, Das, on the ground that Ram Bilas abetted the commission of the offence committed by Bameshar Das.4. The Joint Magistrate has taken cognizance of the case as against Ram Bilas, holding that Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code has no application to the case.5. It has been held by this Court, amongst others, that when an offence described in Section 463, or Sections 471, 475 and 476 of...
Emperor Vs. Chaturbhuj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All137
Stuart, J.1. This application in revision arises out of the following facts. On the 29th of April, 1922, which was market day in the town of Chhibramau, in the Farrakhabad district, Bachan Lal, a cloth merchant, was carrying on business in his shop. The applicant and another person came to the shop of Bachan Lal and said to him that if he continued to sell foreign cloth, they would put pickets on to his shop to prevent his doing so. Bachan Lal replied that as long as foreign cloth was available, he would sell it. The applicant and his companion then told him that, if he did so, he would be fined 5 per cent, of the value of his stock. He refused to pay the fine and pickets were accordingly put upon his shop, who, apparently without using actual violence, prevented effectively any customer reaching the shop of Bachan Lal for a matter of two hours. Owing to this circumstance he lost two hours' trade and the consequent profit. After two hours he paid the fine, obeyed the order not to sell ...
Chaturbhuj Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-03-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All529; 71Ind.Cas.110
Stuart, J.1. This application in revision arises out of the following facts. On the 29th April 1922 which was market day in the town of Chibramau, in the Farrukhabad District, Bachan Lal, a cloth merchant, was carrying on business in his shop. The applicant and another person came to the shop of Bachan Lal and said to him that if he continued to sell foreign cloth, they would put pickets on to his shop to prevent his doing so. Bachan Lal replied that as long as foreign cloth was available, he would sell it. The applicant and his companion then told him that, if he did so, he would be fined 5 per cent, of the value of his stock. He refused to pay the fin and pickets were accordingly put upon his shop who apparently without using actual violence, prevented effectively any customer reaching the shop of Bachan Lal for a matter of two hours. Owing to this circumstance he lost two hours trade and the consequent profit. After two hours he paid the fine, obeyed the order not to sell foreign cl...
Chhote Lal Vs. Chhedi Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All135
Grimwood Mears, C.J. and Piggott, J.1. This application was originally filed as one in revision against an order passed by the Sessions Judge of Etawah, refusing to interfere with the order of a gentleman holding the office of District Magistrate of the district of Etawah, whereby he overruled an order passed by the Superintendent of Police of that district and, contrary to the opinion of the said Superintendent, granted sanction for the prosecution of the applicant Chhote Lal, on the allegation that the said Chhote Lal had committed a contempt of the lawful authority of the Police Officer in charge of a certain police station in that district by giving the said Police officer false information, with such intent as to make the giving of the information an offence punishable under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge was perfectly right in refusing to interfere. If the District Magistrate had authority to grant the sanction in question, he had that authority in virtu...
Hira Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1922
Reported in: 71Ind.Cas.256
Rafique, J.1. The applicant, Hira Lal, is a resident of the Cantonment in Meerut. It seems that he began to erect a building within the Cantonment limits and a servant of the Cantonment Authority reported that the said Construction was in contravention of the Cantonment Rules. A notice was served, under the Cantonments Act, upon the applicant. The learned Cantonment Magistrate himself proceeded to the spot and inspected the building under construction to see if a breach of the Cantonment Rules had been committed. Thereafter, according to the applicant, under the sanction of the Cantonment Magistrate, a formal complaint was lodged against him, Hira Lal, the applicant, in the Court of the Cantonment Magistrate. The applicant moved the District Magistrate to transfer his case to some other Court on several allegations, the principal of which was that the prosecution having been started at the instance or under the sanction of the Cantonment Magistrate, he, the applicant, apprehended that,...
Chhotay Lal Vs. Chhedi Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All149; 73Ind.Cas.341
ORDER1. This application was originally filed as one in revision against an order passed by the Session's Judge of Etawah refusing to interfere with the order of a gentleman holding the office of District Magistrate of the district of Etawah whereby he overruled an order passed by the Superintendent of Police of that district and contrary to the opinion of the said Superintendent, granted sanction for the prosecution of the applicant, Chhotey Lal, on the allegation that the said Chhotey Lal had committed a contempt of the lawful authority of the Police Officer in charge of a certain Police station in that district by giving the said Police Officer false information with such intent as to make the giving of the information an offence punishable under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge was perfectly right in refusing to interfere. If the District Magistrate had authority to grant the sanction in question he had that authority in virtue of the provisions of the Polic...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›